The already-complex task of reaching a long-term agreement on Iran’s nuclear program could get a little more complicated.
Reports earlier this week suggested that Russia and Iran are working on an oil-for-goods trade deal worth $20 billion. Such a deal could involve Iran selling Russia 500,000 barrels of oil a day, in exchange for equipment including metal and food.
“If such a deal were to happen, it would be inconsistent with the “¦ joint plan of action,” a senior administration official told reporters Friday.
Under the interim agreement — reached by the United States, United Kingdom, Russia, France, China, and Iran — Iran is not supposed to export, on average, more than 1 million barrels a day.
The official added that they have no information that the Russia-Iran deal has been implemented, but said if it is, it could potentially trigger sanctions.
“If it in fact was sanctionable, we would take the appropriate actions,” the official said, adding that the United States has voiced its concerns about the deal.
Senate Foreign Relations Committee ranking member Bob Corker, in response to report of the Russia-Iran deal, said that “the administration must be prepared to restore all sanctions if Iran cheats.”
Diplomats are expected to head back to Vienna next week to continue discussions aimed at reaching a long-term agreement.
But the official said that negotiators aren’t expected to start drafting the final agreement until May, and are preparing “to dive much more deeply into what a comprehensive agreement might look like on paper.”
- 1 Hillary Clinton Will Win the Nomination, But Then What?
- 2 Bernie Sanders Is a Loud, Stubborn Socialist. Republicans Like Him Anyway.
- 3 How Politics Breaks Our Brains, and How We Can Put Them Back Together
- 4 The Pen, Phone, and Stray Voltage
- 5 Divided GOP Ponders Way Forward on Criminal Justice Reform
What We're Following See More »
Much has been made of David Brooks’s recent New York Times column, in which confesses to missing already the civility and humanity of Barack Obama, compared to who might take his place. In NewYorker.com, Jeffrey Frank reminds us how critical such attributes are to foreign policy. “It’s hard to imagine Kennedy so casually referring to the leader of Russia as a gangster or a thug. For that matter, it’s hard to imagine any president comparing the Russian leader to Hitler [as] Hillary Clinton did at a private fund-raiser. … Kennedy, who always worried that miscalculation could lead to war, paid close attention to the language of diplomacy.”
“We haven’t seen a true leftist since FDR, so many millions are coming out of the woodwork to vote for Bernie Sanders; he is the Occupy movement now come to life in the political arena.” So says Bill Maher in his Hollywood Reporter cover story (more a stream-of-consciousness riff than an essay, actually). Conservative states may never vote for a socialist in the general election, but “this stuff has never been on the table, and these voters have never been activated.” Maher saves most of his bile for Donald Trump and Sarah Palin, writing that by nominating Palin as vice president “John McCain is the one who opened the Book of the Dead and let the monsters out.” And Trump is picking up where Palin left off.